"Rambo Rome Invasion", better make a Patch / Houserule

[jon_j_rambo]

Hi Hubert / Z-League players,

I really enjoy your SC-game. There have been lots of patches, strategies, smak-talk, ladders, z-leagues, carrier-bugs, play balance, tech-rate-fixes, etc.......I have some news for you, I've got another Classic Rambo move.

Well,"Oops!...I did it again" --- Britteny Spears, can't believe I quoted her, but the Las Vegas concert was free on HBO. And Yes, I've done it again.

More to come soon, check the AAR for details. I'll let Terif & Zappsweden sort this out.

I am, Rambo-Hollywood. I have perfected the "Rambo Rome Invasion", Coming to the Boot near you...Ha-Ha

"It's a Legend thing" --- Rambo 2003

[ June 01, 2003, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[zappsweden]

Rambo is right. Rambo Rome invasion (turn 5) has no known counter.

The tactic includes Canadian army, 2 french armies, one carrier, all UK air (from southern France) and a corps (to put inside Rome). All 3 armies can strike Rome since one of them lands fron Northeast. Why Rome start at entrenchment 4 and not entrenchment 6 is strange. I mean, if u want to prevent something, why not go all the way?

There is nothing stopping it. This invasion is already on turn 5!!!

[ June 01, 2003, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

I am wondering about if the inevitable is comming now i.e house rules. Once the first house rule is coming, there will be more following i guess. Not good.

[Terif]

Before playing Zappsweden, Rambo used the Rom gambit against me and Italy surrendered in turn 5 too. In contrary to the game with Zapp, he tried to crush me in France (like in every game, cause he likes the short games ) using 4 airfleets and Hq + carriers near Paris. He had a lot of luck and his corps in Paris survived three times (the first one with strength 1 ) the german attacks with a 2 hex front and 4 airfleets. Therefore France surrendered not until August 1940.

Now in December 1940, Italy is liberated, Norway and Sweden conquered. I am pretty sure he will loose this game like all the others. So the Rom gambit doesnt change the outcome of the game (at least not in this one). But it totally changes the game itself. Air is king, with the need to reconquer the Med without any navy. With the gambit Axis dont loose much mpp in ground units, but they loose all italian navy. So the Med totally belongs to the Allies. In Russia there is not much change.

Against experienced players, especially if they are aware of the Rom possibility (in this game I wasnt, therefore it was an advantage for Allies), the Rom gambit is like the LC gambit a short term strategy.

But against new or average players it can be a killer. Germany has to play very efficient to conquer France with the Rom gambit. Especially a problem since there doesnt exist a real counter, except taking Paris as fast as possible. Without the 3 armies and no air resistance, Paris should be taken a bit earlier than normal. But this is only possible with some SC experience, otherwise Germany will probably loose fast.

Therefore I also think: it would be better to have the corps in Rom entrenched with Lv6 instead of 4. If possible with a second corps at the side. Cause entrenchment alone cant prevent this gambit.

For Zappsweden:

In the game with me, Rambo noticed that he cant hold France, even with Italy knocked out. And if one of the 3 attacks had succeded, he would have lost his Hq and perhaps some air. I think probably because of this experience he didnt try to stop you in France and saved his air for later .

By the way: we already discussed the problem with the normal italian gambit in your Med Scenario. With the much more extreme Rom gambit, you really have a problem in the Med. Like your AAR - with Greece and Bulgaria taken by Allies - shows. At least for your Med Scenario you really need a house rule against the Rom gambit.

[ June 01, 2003, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[zappsweden]

Terif, Italy also lose all the ground units and that is alot of MPP. I think the plunder UK gets for Italy plus the big MPP per turn can make Allies very tough. The gambit will succeed regardless of my new scenario or the original one. The follow up after Rome falls might be different, who knows. We might be heading for bidding for who gets Allies instead of the opposite if this becomes standard opening for Allies.

It IS like the Dutch Gambit except there is no way of stopping it from happen. In LC gambit case, atleist Axis could declare war on it on turn 2.

[ June 01, 2003, 04:19 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[jon_j_rambo]

So what are you guys trying to say? I guess you want to play Allies & try out yourself. I agree with both of you, my Post-Rome moves have a little to be desired I didn't even script it! Only tried in 3-times on HotSeat, never thought about after I take it My air-game needs sharpened up. I bring my own style of play to the table. I'm not #1 or #2, but #3. I know my role, I'm a Legend. I'm the most popular player in the world, & #1 in the United States.

Say what you want about me, just enjoy the Rambo Rome Invasion!!!

[ June 01, 2003, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[John DiFool]

Hopefully we will have (in SC2) neutral majors

who can buy units and position them where they

want to-that will put an end to these silly

gambits. And violations of territorial waters

w/o a DoW should also cause war readiness to

skyrocket for the country about to be attacked...

John DiFool

[Terif]

Zapp:

If you want you can introduce a "anti-Rom-gambit house rule" in the Zappleague .

Cause you are right: If the Rom gambit will become a standard Allied strategy, then lots of players will have a problem winning with Axis. And its not much fun fighting with this gamey tactic, at least not in every game. Once its ok, its something different, but I also didnt want this micromanagement thing too often...

I prefer a longer game, where strategy decides upon victory or defeat.

[ June 01, 2003, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Terif:

Zapp:

If you want you can introduce a "anti-Rom-gambit house rule" in the Zappleague .

Cause you are right: If the Rom gambit will become a standard Allied strategy, then lots of players will have a problem winning with Axis. And its not much fun fighting with this gamey tactic, at least not in every game. Once its ok, its something different, but I also didnt want this micromanagement thing too often...

I prefer a longer game, where strategy decides upon victory or defeat.

True. In these situations (where you take the Italian invasion for granted hence bidding accordingly) where such tactic become standard, a bad roll attacking Rome could mean everything. If Allies do fail in their attempt, Axis wins the game. Yes, game should be won by strategy, not by rolls.

[ June 01, 2003, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

I am thinking of a good house rule for Z-league. What do u think?

1. Allies are NOT allowed to DOW Italy.

[jon_j_rambo]

Zapp --- Yes, that would prevent the Rambo Rome Invasion, but also prevents the previous Italian gambits.

[Terif]

I am voting for this house rule

But its not so important for me, so other players should decide...

[ June 01, 2003, 04:06 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[Edwin P.]

As John DiFool said, perhaps the best solution is to have Italian War readiness skyrocket.

Ie: IF if three or more allied transports are adjacent to the Italian coast then Italian war readiness increases to 100% and Italy enters the war when the Allied turn ends.

Ie: IF any Allied units enter the Adriatic Italian readiness increases by 100%.

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

As John DiFool said, perhaps the best solution is to have Italian War readiness skyrocket.

Ie: IF if three or more allied transports are adjacent to the Italian coast then Italian war readiness increases to 100% and Italy enters the war when the Allied turn ends.

Ie: IF any Allied units enter the Adriatic Italian readiness increases by 100%.

yes, but that is out of our control. We cannot change the functionality of the game without a patch.

[Iron Ranger]

Congrats Rambo, good job thinking out side the box. Funny thing is just two days ago I came to the conclusion that the only way to hold the med for the allies was the premtive strike against Italy (three consictive failers of holding egpyt will do that). Never thought of pulling 2 F Armys off the line, was thinging more of wiping out the navy before the French navy went bye, bye.

In any case good job. The game now moves from being a speed game (the first 10 moves really determine the winner, outside of 'lucky' tech advances) to now the game will turn on its head with the invasion of Italy on turn 5. LOL

[Liam]

Every Gambit has a counter. I suggest we research it like we have with Dutch and Old Italian fleet killer and utilize it...

If so many Brit Carriers and ships are outta place and the player is defending france for long? Something gives. Perhaps 3-4 Armies landing in UK with an HQ right before fall of France when the UK player still feels safe with Amsterdam Air coverage could make people reconsider this move?

You have to play hotseat a few turns and work out a way to silmetanously hit UK... Especially with a 0 bid for the Allies it may prove a bit difficult if France is down, and UK is directly threatened and forget Italy and just transfer all air to Invade England.

[Shaka of Carthage]

As someone pointed out, your discussion about how to handle this within Zappleague is just like the discussion regarding the other gambits.

The Allies pay a cost for doing this. The counter to the Dutch gambit wasn't obvious the first time it occurred. There is a counter to this also, even if its just the fact that the Allies don't get any more bid favoritism.

The intent of Houserules is to add something to the game or take something away. Not restrict a specific gambit.

[jon_j_rambo]

I want HOUSE-RULE regarding SPAIN. It's a joke. It takes Axis 2-turns, cookie cutter style. It gives them Gibralter, Portugal, supply in North Africa, & there is nothing the Allies can do. In doesn't even effect Russian readiness (maybe 4% or something). It's worth a ton of MMP's. I don't think the Axis should be allowed to invade Spain OR they should only be allowed to move 1-hex at a time, more realistic mountain movement.

I want HOUSE-RULE "How the game ends". It's stupid, you keep playing until 1947? It allows the Axis to "play slow", unrealistic. United States should be getting more cash as the war goes on.

I want HOUSE-RULE on the Terif-Bogus-bug find on invading UK. NO parking in UK without bordering London. It cost me a game against him.

I want a HOUSE-RULE how much experience Terif can give his carriers.

I want a HOUSE-RULE how many carriers Zappsweden can build. Last game he built 5, it cost me the game.

I want a HOUSE-RULE on the use of Axis-minor units. Everybody uses them to invade Greece & they fight like world beaters when debarking from the Sea. Axis-minor units should only be allowed in their country or into Russian 5-hexes. They should NEVER be allowed to debark/embark.

I want a HOUSE-RULE about the Bogus-Port-Supply move.

I want a HOUSE-RULE that you can attack my HQ's.

I want a HOUSE-RULE on the number of Air-Units.

I want a HOUSE-RULE about the first attack on Russia.

I want a HOUSE-RULE about invading the USA or Canada.

I want a HOUSE-RULE that Air-Units can't attack units under strength-5.

I want a HOUSE-RULE that Air-Units can't attack Subs.

I want a HOUSE-RULE requiring Axis to buy at least 3 new subs.

I want alot of changes.

[ June 01, 2003, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[Edwin P.]

Interesting, I have never built carriers as the UK.

[JerseyJohn]

General Rambo

Being a non-ladder player I can't make a direct comment on these things as the House Rules wouldn't affect me. But regarding SC itself, you've compiled a Great List of game weaknesses that need to be changed.

Thanks for taking an important issue (game inaccuracies) and leading the way toward getting them corrected. House Rules today and hopefully game engine corrections to follow.

[ June 02, 2003, 04:32 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Codename Condor]

Funny cow, great thread this is!! what a joke...

Im very disapointed some1 finally has managed to find out my way to conquer italy in turn 5, well, i posted that thread so long ago i just cant remember when...i didnt say how i did it but i posted it as a warn that i wasnt going to allow such a move in any of my games, and as i told in that thread i wasnt going to do it never.

Now, i knew some players would go for it thinking of it as a great discovery, i only know its a great ****, and trying to use it says much about a player. Well, Rambo, more than proud i will be ashamed of using it, if that is yer way to try to beat terif then u r really crazy about it.

My only sorrow is that maybe that first thread has lead to unscrupulous players to find the way to do it. i did it a as warn against it.

[zappsweden]

Condor, that is why we must have a house-rule soon. If Rome invasion was not absurd then we would not get the reactions we get from some players. I have tried the invasion once in a Z-league game. My opponent was not very happy about it.

But, I have experience similar things myself. I remember first time I experienced the Russia landings. Boom, there goes Odessa, there goes Riga.

Another gamey thing, the load+unload a unit from a port attacking with big bonus from same hex that started from.

Also, I was not very happy the first time I experienced long-range HQ extermination. BOOM, there goes the HQ, there goes the front line, there goes the game.

THE ONLY THING WE CAN DO IS STICK TO THE RULES. If we create moralic rules, instead of house rules, everyone will have their own opinion on what is allowed. We will only get arguments and accusations. "You were so coward" or "I should have won if u had not...".

It is better if we unify by certain house rules that benfits everyone and leave out those where ppl have different opinions. That is why I would like to hear and get votes in the topic I started concerning house rules.

[ June 04, 2003, 06:11 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Codename Condor]

rambo

U still wanna stick with that name? how was that? 'Rambo-Rome-Invasion'??

take this:

No more R-R-I

Date: March 14.

ZAPP

Zapp, i proposed a home-rule for Rome-Invasion, i supported the US-Invasion rule, they are flaws, and they shouldnt in any way be used.

But, the riga-invasion and the long range-HQ ussies are not flaws!, i know u get angry if a HQ is destroyed but as i told u, that is a human fault, u didnt take care. The Riga issue is annoying i admit it, but i can live with it.

They are VERY different issues, i hope u can see that.

I just dont care about house rules i play the players i think they are playing fair, if one player makes a move such as the Rome-invasion against me i dont play him anymore. If rambo is using some moves i dont think to be fair i tell him to advise me if hes doing it again, cause in that case im not playing him. If terif tells me he doesnt like some kind of move i did i just dont do it anymore, if i find they are annoying as I did.